Artists Who Truly "Developed"

Not mentioned quite as much now as it was few years ago, but one of the problems with the contemporary record industry is supposed to be that "artist development" went out the window at some point in favor of the quick buck.

So which artists "developed" under the guiding hand of their label back in the day?

I suppose the criteria would be: two or three tentative, maybe not-so-great albums, but they stayed on the same label and eventually started making great music and continued to make great music thereafter, presumably because the development was complete.

lil wayne

DJ Quik

justin timberlake

I can't believe Lil Wayne is only 28.

Prince

xpost

holy shit

would MJ count for this? his case is kinda the same as timberlake -- they both started making immediately great music as solo artists but music that was different enough from (& better than) the music they made as part of a group

Stevie Wonder

xp The difference is Jackson 5 were great in their own right, where Nsync were not.

"staying on the same label" really cuts this down

Thing about MJ, Timberlake, and (maybe?) Wayne is that their early records were selling though. It's not like the label was losing money on them but hoping their A&R investment would pay off down the road. Wayne might be kind of a special case b/c he was so young, I dunno.

Well I suppose from a popularity standpoint -- a few off the top of my head, none of which really sold much out of the gate.

Doobie Brothers
Jackson Browne
Little Feat
ZZ Top
Kiss

I can't believe Lil Wayne is only 28.

― Mark, Monday, April 25, 2011 12:16 AM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark

i said this on another thread but wayne is one of the most unique rappers in history for having a career of relevance that lasts from the ages of 15 to 28 and counting. you could write a book on what has happened to his voice alone.

wayne's albums weren't huge sellers compared to the rest of what cash money was putting out -- he was seen as a relatively minor artist by tons of people even dating into like tha carter II and a bit after that

yeah, janet would be a perfect answer if she hadn't switched labels

Yeah, the idea is to locate artists who developed, got better, and sold more records because their labels stuck by them and presumably helped them to grow, which is the way things used to be apparently.

this doesn't really fit the bill, but it is curious to me how warners have stuck by the flaming lips for almost 20 years

jenny lewis

Grateful Dead

Kings of Leon (in the US anyway. If they hadn't done so well overseas, there's no way RCA would have held on so long.)

Springsteen
Dylan
John Cougar
Judas Priest
Fleetwood Mac
Willie Nelson
Blue Oyster Cult

Poco

journey

Kate Bush provides an interesting variant on this: she was signed by EMI at 16, and they let her educate herself and work out her life and talents for a few years before letting her into the studio to record her first hit album.

Same thing happened with Mary J. Blige iirc.

did dave gilmour hook up mary j. blige too?

Same thing happened with Mary J. Blige iirc.

The Bee Gees.

There was a terrible docu thing on BBC last night, where Barry told Robin how much he loved him and vice versa, but talking about the transformation around Mr. Natural/ Main Course you realised how alone among Brit bands of their generation, they reinvented themselves instead of just repeating the formula (see the Stones) - i suppose the other example would be Fleetwood Mac, but that was with wholesale line up changes, whereas the Gibbs did it all themselves.

Diane Arbus

Mandatory Dog Latin shout out for the boo radleys.

Thin Lizzy

watched a Thin Lizzy gig on telly this morning. damn Phil was charismatic

I suppose the criteria would be: two or three tentative, maybe not-so-great albums, but they stayed on the same label and eventually started making great music and continued to make great music thereafter, presumably because the development was complete.

wouldn't the criteria be 2-3 albums that perhaps didn't sell that well or underperformed? ie the kind of thing that might make a label drop an artist nowadays. and then after that, either the artist started to make albums that sold bucketloads, or they found a niche where they perhaps didn't get top 10 hits, but built up a loyal cult audience which would stay with them for the rest of their career.

janet jackson's probably a great example of the former. maybe any given alt/art type 90s artist for the latter.

Yeah, sales should be a key part of it.

Scott Walker immediately comes to mind

low-hanging fruit:
radiohead
the beatles
the rolling stones
bob dylan
miles davis

Kraftwerk - didn't really like the first few albums, but their later stuff did way better commercially and was a lot better reviewed

Ween - I do like the early stuff, but I never thought they'd turn into really legit songwriters and super talented musicians. When Chocolate and Cheese was released they were definitely one of the best bands around

Underworld - from "Underneath the Radar" to "Dirty Epic"...whaaa?

Feel like there are a lot of jazz artists that fit this description.

Dolly Parton

Jazz seems like a different thing. Partly b/c of overhead. You could cut an album in a day, and pay everyone but the leader a session rate. And it wasn't this kind of thing where the execs had to nurture this immature talent. Since jazz is all about playing every night, seems like that happened more on the bandstand.

radiohead

Their first single was a big hit though.

the beatles

??? Their first single was #1 in the US

the rolling stones

1st album was #1 in the UK

bob dylan

Yeah, his first one didn't do so well, though his second one did.

miles davis

He was pretty damn famous and important early on in his career, having played with Bird and everything. Not sure about sales, but it seems like they picked up pretty quickly.

It seems like the singer/songwriter era was the biggest time for this. People like Laura Nyro, etc.

Steely Dan
Guns 'n' Roses - they don't fit the "stayed on the label, multiple albums" deal but it was artist development that made Appetite happen, they'd never have gotten their shit together without it
Roberta Flack
Joni Mitchell
Jackson Browne
Bruce Springsteen
Pat Metheny
Keith Jarrett
these last two are more a case of a comfortable label home allowing them to grow
the Cocteau Twins
the Doors

I understand that several of these artists can be taken by detractors as good arguments against artist development

I suspect "artist development" was always just code for "let's pay people in cocaine to buy cocaine for artists".

Dolly Parton

is this a boobs joke

@ Euler - No, I kind of believe in it. When you know that you're under a multiple-albums contract and that the people who run the label believe in you - if the staff stays consistent - you are free to worry less about your next move. I can attest to this. That's what people are talking about when they talk about "development" - an artist feeling like if he makes a left turn and the marketplace isn't feeling it, he's got an employer who'll keep giving him work. Which means artists can make those left turns and then relocate their zone and wait for people to say that the record that seemed like a weird move actually made sense in the broader context of the career, etc.

This need not be on a single label; artists have followed A&R guys & label managers though they usually try to be quiet about it.

add to list of artists who developed: Marvin Gaye

ok, that's cool---that way of putting it makes it seem like artist development is/was simply the promise that you could make a record that was a relative flop & still stay signed.

I'm interested also if there's something to the "development" of artist development, are there artists for whom the "tricks" of label staff helped that artist along career-wise? beyond just saying, go ahead & follow your spirit & we'll have your back.

the beatles

??? Their first single was #1 in the US

Haha uh no.

I mean for the first two years of their recording career Capitol Records, the US arm of Parlophone's parent company EMI, wouldn't even distribute them. EMI had to license the music to other labels -- notably Vee Jay Records -- and all of their first several singles and albums failed to chart at all. They already had a couple of UK #1s and top tens before Capitol agreed to release "I Want To Hold Your Hand."

RIP Morocco

killed by the internet

Apple Store kills Morocco

lots of artists still take long hiatuses to travel and/or develop a new sound, though. unless you're really lamenting rock bands with a dilettantish interest in 'world music'?

I think he's lamenting artists being able to bill that long hiatus to the label. Which is otm. If you're going to take a long hiatus now, you're going to have to stay on the road in that time - you won't be drawing any income from album sales & the label won't be accepting receipts from your time in Kashmir.

(Also scarequotes notwithstanding I think a dillettantish interest in world music is better than no interest whatsoever in musics outside one's immediate purview)

Or you have to go back to your day job no homo

The Cure
Talk Talk

sure wish my day job would pay me while i take a long hiatus to work on music and learn to play qarkabeb (via morocco)

Having trouble thinking of any band coming back from an 'explore the world' label-funded hiatus for the better (except Robert Palmer)

Those 360 deals seem like, "Oh hi, we noticed you rowing your dinghy around in the bay. Luckily for you, we're going to allow you to rope it to our capsized yacht."

Robert Palmer is a perfect example. God, the guy made so many "experimental" albums.

Having trouble thinking of any band coming back from an 'explore the world' label-funded hiatus for the better (except Robert Palmer)

Rolling Stones

altho maybe that was just Brian Jones

Brian Jones more interested in exploring the world of pussy imo

led zep?

Having trouble thinking of any band coming back from an 'explore the world' label-funded hiatus for the better (except Robert Palmer)

Alannis Morrisette lol

does Madonna going to England count

I was totes thinking of Alanis but this love for her is singular xp

A mid-70's (or 80's) hiatus is today's regular time between albums.

Ween - I do like the early stuff, but I never thought they'd turn into really legit songwriters and super talented musicians. When Chocolate and Cheese was released they were definitely one of the best bands around

not signed to a major until their SIXTH album, and the first five were spread across four different labels.

Underworld - from "Underneath the Radar" to "Dirty Epic"...whaaa?

Freur got dropped by a major, reformed as Underworld (mk I) and signed to a different one.
Underworld got dropped by their major when the second album flopped.
Reformed as Underworld mk II, signed to an indie, got successful and stayed for a few albums before label-hopping in the last decade.

Blur and Orbital, almost. Both had early hit singles but weren't really cooking commercially till LP3 or so, and both developed massively in terms of music-making.

Public Enemy? I know a lot of people love the debut, but Millions & Black Planet are definitely developments from there.

My Bloody Valentine

Beatles in India? (xposts)

My Bloody Valentine

Four labels in three years.

Robert Palmer is a perfect example. God, the guy made so many "experimental" albums.

But he crashed quickly. Everything after Heavy Nova is a disaster, I never really enjoyed Don't Explain, Honey and R&B. Ridin' High had its moments but like everything he made in the 1990s it sounded incredibly cheap.

Scooter are a fine recent example. Also, Rammstein.

at the moment, the best thing about total control is that they sound like a different (and to my mind a better) band with each release. angry new wave to primitive synth experiments to melodic coldwave to ... minimal techno?

Many I can think of seem to fit the bill until I realize they changed record labels before becoming popular. Bonnie Raitt and NRBQ come to mind. Some afformentioned artists fall into this category - Michael Jackson made his first four solo albums on Motown before they dropped him - his last two albums for Motown tanked and they dropped him. Whoops! I'm sure Motown wouldn't have minded the profits from Off The Wall and Thriller. Someone mentioned Poco, but they were dropped by Columbia by 1975, thus missing out on their late-70s hits.

John Martyn's first few albums didn't sell all that well, at least initially - not sure if he jumped labels. Likewise Harry Nilsson.

Van Morrison's Astral Weeks and Moondance are classic million-plus sellers today, but they went nowhere upon initial release. AW missed the top 200. (Blowin' Your Mind was on a different label, and wasn't intended to be an album anyway).

Van Morrison's Astral Weeks and Moondance are classic million-plus sellers today, but they went nowhere upon initial release. AW missed the top 200. (Blowin' Your Mind was on a different label, and wasn't intended to be an album anyway).

― Lee626, Wednesday, April 27, 2011 10:04 PM (6 days ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

didnt those drop after his biggest hit though?

highest charting album is St Dominic's Preview and highest charting single is "Domino," both '71. Astral Weeks is '68 and Moondance is '70.

But Them did better, didn't they?

not according to Billboard - Them barely even existed as a charts entity

1965 Gloria The Billboard Hot 100 93
1965 Here Comes the Night The Billboard Hot 100 24
1965 Mystic Eyes The Billboard Hot 100 33
1966 Gloria The Billboard Hot 100 71

huh thought it would be brown eyed girl

Brown Eyed Girl 10, Domino 9, don't know what the profile was overseas

and of course the unforgettable "Redwood Tree" peaked at #98 in 1972

Them had a couple of top ten singles in the UK though.

when did brown eyed girl chart?

1967

this is all under the "charts" tab in allmusic

c'mon "Brown Eyed Girl" charting one spot below "Domino" is a pretty flimsy technicality, point is dude had a major hit and serious pop profile well before his supposed 'developing' period

Shadows of Knight's cover of Gloria "Reached number 10 in 1966, topping the original in the U.S. only in areas where Them's version could not be played, because it contained the words, "She comes to my room"." Basically Gloria was one of the biggest songs of the '60s. Not counting it is dumb, especially considering that it probably would have been a charting hit in the US if it hadn't been censored.

And anyway, yeah Brown Eyed Girl, '67, "rose to number eight on the Cashbox charts, and reached number ten on the Billboard Hot 100"

let's argue about how various Pakistani pop artists didn't truly "develop" because their action on the New Zealand Adult Contemporary charts was negligible

From a company's viewpoint, this is more about commercial than artistic development, right?

I guess the likes of Springsteen, Bon Jovi etc. fit in. These days, artists aren't given this time though, they are expected to sell at once, or get dropped.

Blur and Orbital, almost. Both had early hit singles but weren't really cooking commercially till LP3 or so, and both developed massively in terms of music-making.

They weren't really on majors though. OK, so Blur was on Food, which was backed by EMI, but Food was sort of expected to be an "indie" label with limited sales.

Yeah, the idea is to locate artists who developed, got better, and sold more records because their labels stuck by them and presumably helped them to grow, which is the way things used to be apparently.

Surely Pulp are the most obvious answer to this question? Years toiling in obscurity before they became huge.

I don't think people like Janet Jackson really count here, the MJ connection alone gave her a commercial advantage that most artists will never have.

Although Pulp did switch labels, so forget that.

The Grateful Dead - there's more to it (i.e., the growth of the live-Dead cult) but there's a classic case of label development helping out I think

??? Their first single was #1 in the US

No that was their fifth single. Their first single went UK #17. The second one went UK #2 though, and the third went UK #1.

Yes, I already acknowledged the error upthread. Love Me Do was a #1 in the US but only when it was re-released 2 years later. Please Please Me was #1 on the Melody Maker and NME charts. No development required.